NFL notebook: DEA checks teams’ medical staffs as part of investigation |

NFL notebook: DEA checks teams’ medical staffs as part of investigation

• Federal drug enforcement agents showed up unannounced Sunday to check at least two NFL teams’ medical staffs as part of an investigation into former players’ claims that teams mishandled prescription drugs, a law enforcement official told the Associated Press. There were no arrests, according to the official, who was not authorized to speak publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity. The official said the 49ers’ staff was checked at MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, N.J., after they played the Giants. The Buccaneers were checked at a Washington-area airport after playing the Redskins. A person familiar with the investigation told Bloomberg News as many as seven teams were being inspected.

• Vikings running back Adrian Peterson, in a statement through the NFL Players Association, denied he backed out of Friday’s hearing and claimed the pre-discipline meeting wasn’t part of the collective bargaining agreement. Peterson claimed the NFL was late to respond to questions about the nature of Friday’s hearing in connection to his child-abuse case in Texas despite the NFLPA’s repeated attempts to gain clarity from the league.

• Seahawks running back Marshawn Lynch could be fined $100,000 by the NFL for refusing to speak to reporters after the team’s 24-20 loss to the Chiefs. ProFootballTalk reported the NFL informed Lynch he would be fined $100,000 if he did not talk to reporters after the game.

• Titans tight end Chase Coffman was fined $30,000 after an incident last Sunday in which he knocked down Ravens assistant coach Tony Coaxum on the sideline, according to an NFL spokesman. Video showed Coffman run out of bounds and hit an unsuspecting Coaxum and then appear to drag his cleat across the coach’s body before returning to the field.

— Wire reports

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.